WEBVTT - Charles Schwab Challenge: Odds, Best PGA Bets, and One-And-Done Picks (Ep. 703)

0:00:01.080 --> 0:00:04.000
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Betting Pros PGA Podcast. I'm Pat fitz

0:00:04.080 --> 0:00:07.480
<v Speaker 1>Morris here with my buddy Bo mcbrair. Scotty Scheffler wins

0:00:07.480 --> 0:00:11.040
<v Speaker 1>the PGA Championship and now he's an overwhelming favorite at

0:00:11.039 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>this week's Charles Schwap Challenge in Fort Worth, Texas. It's

0:00:14.400 --> 0:00:17.080
<v Speaker 1>a home game for Scotty, who lives in nearby Dallas

0:00:17.320 --> 0:00:19.440
<v Speaker 1>bow and I will give you a full betting preview

0:00:19.480 --> 0:00:22.240
<v Speaker 1>of the Charles Schwab Challenge. We'll talk about the course,

0:00:22.360 --> 0:00:25.200
<v Speaker 1>the field, the odds, We'll tell you who we're betting,

0:00:25.800 --> 0:00:27.880
<v Speaker 1>and we will make our weekly one and done picks

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:29.400
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the show. But let's start with

0:00:29.440 --> 0:00:32.720
<v Speaker 1>a quick recap of the PGA. Scotty was eleven under

0:00:32.760 --> 0:00:36.919
<v Speaker 1>par over four rounds at Quail Hollow in Charlotte, North Carolina.

0:00:37.000 --> 0:00:39.360
<v Speaker 1>His margin of victory wound up being five shots, which

0:00:39.400 --> 0:00:41.800
<v Speaker 1>made it seem like an easy victory, but Scotty and

0:00:41.880 --> 0:00:44.640
<v Speaker 1>John Ram were tied for the lead at nine under

0:00:44.640 --> 0:00:47.360
<v Speaker 1>par as Scotty finished up this front nine on Sunday,

0:00:47.880 --> 0:00:51.760
<v Speaker 1>but then Scotty stopped the accelerator, carding Birdie's on the tenth,

0:00:51.960 --> 0:00:55.440
<v Speaker 1>fourteenth and fifteenth holes. And Rom ran into trouble on

0:00:55.520 --> 0:00:59.680
<v Speaker 1>the so called Green Mile, Quail Hollow's difficult three hole finishing.

0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>Rom lipped out a par put on number sixteen, then

0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:05.400
<v Speaker 1>found the water on the par three seventeenth and made

0:01:05.400 --> 0:01:08.240
<v Speaker 1>double bogie. His title hopes were pretty much dashed at

0:01:08.240 --> 0:01:11.480
<v Speaker 1>that point, and his double bogie in the eighteenth was

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:14.240
<v Speaker 1>just salt in the wound. Scotty shot in even par

0:01:14.400 --> 0:01:16.880
<v Speaker 1>seventy one for his final round, a good number given

0:01:16.920 --> 0:01:20.880
<v Speaker 1>the difficult scoring conditions. But Scotty really set himself up

0:01:20.920 --> 0:01:24.880
<v Speaker 1>for the wind with a spectacular finishing stretch on Sunday.

0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:28.240
<v Speaker 1>He was five under par over his last five holes

0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:32.080
<v Speaker 1>excuse me on Saturday, five hundred power over his last five.

0:01:32.120 --> 0:01:35.119
<v Speaker 1>Scotty drove the green on the par four fourteenth hole

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:38.400
<v Speaker 1>and knocked in a three foot putt for eagle, thenny

0:01:38.440 --> 0:01:42.120
<v Speaker 1>berdie the fifteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth. That gave him a

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:45.320
<v Speaker 1>three shot lead over Alex Norn going into the final round,

0:01:45.640 --> 0:01:48.240
<v Speaker 1>and Scotty caught some good breaks along the way. He

0:01:48.400 --> 0:01:51.440
<v Speaker 1>was using a replacement driver all week after his usual

0:01:51.520 --> 0:01:55.680
<v Speaker 1>driver was deemed non conforming. Rory McElroy had the same

0:01:55.720 --> 0:01:58.120
<v Speaker 1>thing happened to him, and Scotty missed some fairways with

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:00.680
<v Speaker 1>that replacement driver. He got lucky with one of his

0:02:00.720 --> 0:02:03.720
<v Speaker 1>misses on Sunday, he pulled his t shot on number

0:02:03.720 --> 0:02:06.440
<v Speaker 1>two way left. It hit a card path and took

0:02:06.440 --> 0:02:08.720
<v Speaker 1>a big balance. It actually set Scotty up with a

0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:11.000
<v Speaker 1>clear look at the green and an easy little wed

0:02:11.080 --> 0:02:14.360
<v Speaker 1>shot in He burdied the hole. Not that there was

0:02:14.400 --> 0:02:17.240
<v Speaker 1>anything lucky about Scotty's win, but it makes it that

0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:20.520
<v Speaker 1>much harder on the field when the best player in

0:02:20.560 --> 0:02:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the world is getting some occasional breaks. Yeah. Scotty gets

0:02:25.160 --> 0:02:29.880
<v Speaker 1>his third major before his twenty ninth birthday next month.

0:02:29.960 --> 0:02:32.040
<v Speaker 1>His other two wins and majors were at the Masters.

0:02:32.040 --> 0:02:34.320
<v Speaker 1>He'll try to get his first US Open win in

0:02:34.360 --> 0:02:37.920
<v Speaker 1>his first Open Championship win this summer. Bryson, d Chambeau,

0:02:38.000 --> 0:02:40.600
<v Speaker 1>Harris English and Davis Riley finished in a three way

0:02:40.680 --> 0:02:43.560
<v Speaker 1>tie for second at six under par. Tough week for

0:02:43.600 --> 0:02:46.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of the big guns. Rory McElroy, who had

0:02:46.639 --> 0:02:49.600
<v Speaker 1>such a good track record at Quayle Hollow, He finished

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:53.520
<v Speaker 1>plus three tied for forty seventh. Defending PGA champs Ander

0:02:53.600 --> 0:02:57.800
<v Speaker 1>Schoffley finished one under tied for twenty eighth Ludwig Oberg, Justin,

0:02:57.880 --> 0:03:01.160
<v Speaker 1>Thomas Brooks, Koepka, Hideki Matzi, I all missed the cot

0:03:01.720 --> 0:03:04.280
<v Speaker 1>bo I. I thought Quail Hollow was a good venue

0:03:04.320 --> 0:03:07.480
<v Speaker 1>for the PGA. It was tough but fair. Charlotte got

0:03:07.520 --> 0:03:09.079
<v Speaker 1>a lot of rain early in the week. We thought

0:03:09.080 --> 0:03:11.760
<v Speaker 1>I was going to play long, maybe soft, but the

0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:14.280
<v Speaker 1>greens were still nice and firm for most of the tournament.

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:17.240
<v Speaker 1>This was decidedly not a birdie fest. What were your

0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:19.680
<v Speaker 1>takeaways from Scotty's winningt Quail Hollow.

0:03:20.520 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 2>It's business as usual for old Scotty Scheffler. It seems like, oh, well,

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:27.960
<v Speaker 2>we had a lot of excuses why Rory was gonna

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:30.600
<v Speaker 2>be the favorite, Why why Scotty might not be the

0:03:30.600 --> 0:03:32.480
<v Speaker 2>best fit for this golf course. Well, it turns out

0:03:32.480 --> 0:03:34.520
<v Speaker 2>Scotty's a good fit for any golf course he shows

0:03:34.600 --> 0:03:37.520
<v Speaker 2>up at as long as he stays out of jail. This,

0:03:37.800 --> 0:03:40.040
<v Speaker 2>uh it kind of it kind of just looked like

0:03:40.320 --> 0:03:44.040
<v Speaker 2>he was in a zone and and where anytime anytime

0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:47.000
<v Speaker 2>people tell me, oh, he's like Tim Duncan, he's really boring,

0:03:47.120 --> 0:03:50.120
<v Speaker 2>but the fundamentals are there and he's so solid even

0:03:50.160 --> 0:03:52.320
<v Speaker 2>though he's boring. I was like, are you watching the

0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:53.920
<v Speaker 2>same game I am, because this is one of the

0:03:53.960 --> 0:03:55.880
<v Speaker 2>best ball strikers I've ever seen in my life, and

0:03:55.960 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm enthralled every time I watch him play golf like

0:04:00.000 --> 0:04:04.440
<v Speaker 2>it breaks bad breaks. Scotti Scheffler is even keel, but

0:04:04.560 --> 0:04:08.320
<v Speaker 2>even he has I've seen him snap clubs over his

0:04:08.440 --> 0:04:12.280
<v Speaker 2>bag and frustration. I've seen him spike his hat when

0:04:12.280 --> 0:04:17.000
<v Speaker 2>he wins the PGA Championship and let off an explictivef Yeah.

0:04:17.160 --> 0:04:19.599
<v Speaker 2>I mean it's this guy is far from boring. He's

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:22.080
<v Speaker 2>one of the best iron players that's ever walked on

0:04:22.120 --> 0:04:25.080
<v Speaker 2>this planet and we're calling it comparing him to Tim

0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:27.680
<v Speaker 2>Duncan the big fundamental get out of here with that.

0:04:28.320 --> 0:04:32.560
<v Speaker 2>This was a clinic. Scotti Scheffler did win easily. It

0:04:32.600 --> 0:04:35.799
<v Speaker 2>got close on Sunday because John Ram made a charge.

0:04:36.400 --> 0:04:39.120
<v Speaker 2>Everybody else was just kind of playing second fiddle to

0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:43.240
<v Speaker 2>Scottie Scheffler. It was all Scottie all week long, especially

0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:47.559
<v Speaker 2>once he turned home and shot a sixty sixty, sixty six,

0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:51.840
<v Speaker 2>sixty five on Saturday, five under his last five two

0:04:52.000 --> 0:04:57.800
<v Speaker 2>under through the Green Mile. Excuse me, that's insane. He

0:04:57.880 --> 0:05:01.920
<v Speaker 2>made that course bend at the knee, and nobody else

0:05:01.920 --> 0:05:04.039
<v Speaker 2>could do that. Like even John Rahm, who made that

0:05:04.120 --> 0:05:07.600
<v Speaker 2>charge on Sunday, couldn't keep it together five over on

0:05:07.640 --> 0:05:10.200
<v Speaker 2>the Green Mile on Sunday when he had all the

0:05:10.200 --> 0:05:13.599
<v Speaker 2>momentum going his in his favor and it was still

0:05:13.760 --> 0:05:19.480
<v Speaker 2>Scotti Scheffler. Ho hum, business as usual. Another another Major,

0:05:19.560 --> 0:05:23.320
<v Speaker 2>another win. He's just winning everything he looks at and

0:05:23.360 --> 0:05:26.360
<v Speaker 2>he's not even doing He's not even letting them really

0:05:26.440 --> 0:05:29.600
<v Speaker 2>get that close to him, because if you're tied after

0:05:29.920 --> 0:05:32.320
<v Speaker 2>nine holes, he's still got nine more to try to

0:05:32.440 --> 0:05:35.320
<v Speaker 2>keep pace with a guy who doesn't make mistakes, and

0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:38.400
<v Speaker 2>when he makes mistakes, he doesn't compound them ever, So

0:05:38.560 --> 0:05:40.479
<v Speaker 2>good luck to the rest of the field this week.

0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:44.920
<v Speaker 2>It just seems like this guy is just on an

0:05:44.960 --> 0:05:48.440
<v Speaker 2>all time run, and it's the evidence is pointing in

0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:48.880
<v Speaker 2>that direction.

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:52.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it was nice to see big John Rahm get

0:05:52.560 --> 0:05:55.800
<v Speaker 1>back into the back into contention at a major, but

0:05:56.680 --> 0:05:58.960
<v Speaker 1>it just merely meant he was the last to go

0:05:58.960 --> 0:06:00.720
<v Speaker 1>into Scottie Scheffler's wood chipper.

0:06:01.360 --> 0:06:04.720
<v Speaker 2>Well, yeah, basically it was. It was it was fun

0:06:04.720 --> 0:06:07.479
<v Speaker 2>to see Jon Rum enjoying himself on a golf course. Again.

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:10.599
<v Speaker 2>We haven't seen happy John Rahm in a long time,

0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:13.560
<v Speaker 2>and he he looked like he was having some fun

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:15.960
<v Speaker 2>out there, and he was playing some great golf. So

0:06:16.160 --> 0:06:19.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm hopeful that as everything shakes out with the Live

0:06:19.480 --> 0:06:22.440
<v Speaker 2>Tour and any future mergers, that we get back to

0:06:23.000 --> 0:06:26.320
<v Speaker 2>prime gen Ram before he switched to Live, and that

0:06:26.480 --> 0:06:29.520
<v Speaker 2>was that makes for the best theater. When you get

0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:32.520
<v Speaker 2>the big guys gunning at each other and we get

0:06:32.560 --> 0:06:35.120
<v Speaker 2>it all four times a year, that's not enough. We

0:06:35.160 --> 0:06:35.720
<v Speaker 2>need more.

0:06:36.880 --> 0:06:40.839
<v Speaker 1>Agreed. Agreed. Now, we will preview the Charles Schwab Challenge

0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:42.599
<v Speaker 1>in just a moment, But first.

0:06:43.320 --> 0:06:46.440
<v Speaker 2>Download the free Betting Pros app for iOS and Android.

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:50.360
<v Speaker 2>With sportsbook Sinc. You can automatically track your bets across

0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:54.080
<v Speaker 2>all major sports books in one spot. Easily monitor your

0:06:54.120 --> 0:06:57.480
<v Speaker 2>bet performance by sport and bet type, including game picks,

0:06:57.560 --> 0:07:01.200
<v Speaker 2>props and parlays. Go ahead and create your custom betting

0:07:01.279 --> 0:07:05.120
<v Speaker 2>systems to find winning trends and profitable opportunities. Get a

0:07:05.120 --> 0:07:08.280
<v Speaker 2>seven day free trial of Betting Pros Premium by downloading

0:07:08.279 --> 0:07:11.760
<v Speaker 2>the app at Bettingpros dot com, slash apps using code

0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:16.680
<v Speaker 2>juice Juice and activating your trial on the upgrade screen.

0:07:17.840 --> 0:07:21.880
<v Speaker 1>The Charles Schwab Challenge will be played at venerable Colonial

0:07:21.920 --> 0:07:25.440
<v Speaker 1>Country Club in Fort Worth, Texas. Colonial has been hosting

0:07:25.480 --> 0:07:28.920
<v Speaker 1>a PGA Tour event since nineteen forty six. The event

0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:31.320
<v Speaker 1>used to just be called the Colonial. Now it has

0:07:31.400 --> 0:07:35.200
<v Speaker 1>a corporate sponsor. Colonial is not terribly long by PGA

0:07:35.240 --> 0:07:39.080
<v Speaker 1>Tour standards, but it demands accuracy, demands a delicate touch

0:07:39.120 --> 0:07:43.320
<v Speaker 1>around its firm, fast greens, and it usually requires players

0:07:43.320 --> 0:07:46.600
<v Speaker 1>to navigate some win We're talking about a golf course

0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:50.160
<v Speaker 1>in Texas, after all, so it's a par seventy measuring

0:07:50.600 --> 0:07:54.040
<v Speaker 1>seven two and eighty nine yards. Players won't use the

0:07:54.160 --> 0:07:57.640
<v Speaker 1>drivers often on Colonial as they will on some other courses.

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:01.320
<v Speaker 1>They're no par fours over five hundred yards. Saw several

0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:04.760
<v Speaker 1>such long par fours last week at Quail Hollow. Five

0:08:04.840 --> 0:08:07.560
<v Speaker 1>of the twelve par fours at Colonial measure less than

0:08:07.600 --> 0:08:11.280
<v Speaker 1>four hundred and fifteen yards, but with a lot of narrow,

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:14.920
<v Speaker 1>tree lined fairways and dog legs, there's a premium on

0:08:15.040 --> 0:08:18.160
<v Speaker 1>accuracy off the tee. It's important that players set themselves

0:08:18.200 --> 0:08:20.600
<v Speaker 1>up with a good angle of approach to go. Flag hunting,

0:08:21.080 --> 0:08:23.080
<v Speaker 1>short iron play and wedge play are going to be

0:08:23.120 --> 0:08:26.760
<v Speaker 1>important this week. These are small, fast greens, They're hard

0:08:26.800 --> 0:08:29.360
<v Speaker 1>to hit. It's going to be a challenge to hit

0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:33.120
<v Speaker 1>these greens, especially from out of the snarley Bermuda rough.

0:08:33.760 --> 0:08:37.440
<v Speaker 1>Now Colonial lures players to sleep with two easy holes

0:08:37.480 --> 0:08:40.440
<v Speaker 1>at the start. There are only two par fives on

0:08:40.520 --> 0:08:42.400
<v Speaker 1>the course, but one of them is the five hundred

0:08:42.400 --> 0:08:45.319
<v Speaker 1>and eighty one yard first hole. It's a birdy opportunity,

0:08:45.360 --> 0:08:47.760
<v Speaker 1>so is the three hundred and eighty four yard second hole.

0:08:48.240 --> 0:08:53.160
<v Speaker 1>Then players run into the so called horrible horseshoe holes three, four,

0:08:53.200 --> 0:08:55.560
<v Speaker 1>and five. They're three of the four toughest holes on

0:08:55.600 --> 0:08:58.280
<v Speaker 1>the course. Three and five are two of the longest

0:08:58.320 --> 0:09:00.400
<v Speaker 1>par fours on the course, and number four is a

0:09:00.440 --> 0:09:04.160
<v Speaker 1>two hundred and forty eight yard par three. Davis Riley

0:09:04.320 --> 0:09:07.840
<v Speaker 1>is the defending Charles Schwab Challenge champion. He finished fourteen

0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:10.880
<v Speaker 1>under par last year, five shots better than our guy,

0:09:10.920 --> 0:09:14.960
<v Speaker 1>Scotti Scheffler and Keegan Bradley. Emiliano Grio won here in

0:09:15.520 --> 0:09:18.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty three. He finished eight under par and beat

0:09:18.280 --> 0:09:21.400
<v Speaker 1>Adam Shank in a playoff. Sam Burns won in twenty

0:09:21.440 --> 0:09:23.800
<v Speaker 1>twenty two he was nine under par. He beat Scotty

0:09:23.880 --> 0:09:27.360
<v Speaker 1>Scheffler in a playoff. That year, Jason Kokrak won with

0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:29.400
<v Speaker 1>the score of fourteen under par in twenty twenty one,

0:09:29.480 --> 0:09:34.000
<v Speaker 1>and Daniel Berger won here twenty twenty, the first tournament

0:09:34.200 --> 0:09:39.120
<v Speaker 1>after play resumed following the COVID delay. He finished fifteen

0:09:39.240 --> 0:09:43.679
<v Speaker 1>under par and Burger beat Colin Morricawan a playoff. Temperatures

0:09:43.760 --> 0:09:45.800
<v Speaker 1>are expected to be in the mid to upper eighties

0:09:45.840 --> 0:09:49.480
<v Speaker 1>on Thursday and Friday, touching the low nineties Saturday and Sunday.

0:09:49.840 --> 0:09:52.200
<v Speaker 1>No rain in the forecast for the tournament, but we

0:09:52.320 --> 0:09:54.679
<v Speaker 1>will get some win. It's gonna be blowing ten to

0:09:54.679 --> 0:09:57.120
<v Speaker 1>twenty miles an hour according to weather dot com throughout

0:09:57.160 --> 0:09:59.280
<v Speaker 1>the tournament. Sounds like the course is going to play

0:09:59.280 --> 0:10:02.000
<v Speaker 1>firm and fast. What do you make of Colonial.

0:10:02.720 --> 0:10:06.760
<v Speaker 2>It's a shot maker's paradise and accuracy is the only

0:10:06.800 --> 0:10:10.400
<v Speaker 2>thing that matters. Sure seems like a course that might

0:10:10.440 --> 0:10:13.600
<v Speaker 2>fit some guy named Scotti Schefler pretty well accurate off

0:10:13.640 --> 0:10:16.559
<v Speaker 2>the t good iron player, the best iron player in

0:10:16.640 --> 0:10:19.400
<v Speaker 2>the world, hits it closer to the pin than anybody else.

0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:23.440
<v Speaker 2>Doesn't shoot himself in the foot. This this is a

0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:26.439
<v Speaker 2>golf course where if you're not finding fairways, you're pretty

0:10:26.480 --> 0:10:30.000
<v Speaker 2>much not gonna be in contention. If you're finding fairways,

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.520
<v Speaker 2>there's gonna be some birdy opportunities. Even though it's not

0:10:33.600 --> 0:10:38.080
<v Speaker 2>an easy course. The winning scores typically worse than fifteen

0:10:38.120 --> 0:10:40.920
<v Speaker 2>hunder par at the end, which still means you got

0:10:40.920 --> 0:10:44.240
<v Speaker 2>to shoot sixty six, sixty six and so on, like

0:10:44.360 --> 0:10:48.200
<v Speaker 2>mid sixties all four days to win this thing. It's

0:10:48.240 --> 0:10:51.760
<v Speaker 2>gonna be fun to watch these guys try to avoid

0:10:51.800 --> 0:10:54.640
<v Speaker 2>double bogies from the trees because a lot of guys

0:10:54.679 --> 0:10:57.120
<v Speaker 2>are going to be in the trees. I think if

0:10:57.160 --> 0:10:59.960
<v Speaker 2>you find the fairway here, it's a second shot target park,

0:11:00.200 --> 0:11:03.599
<v Speaker 2>target practice type golf course with a lot of birdy opportunities.

0:11:03.640 --> 0:11:07.120
<v Speaker 2>But these are the third narrowest fairways on the PGA Tour,

0:11:07.280 --> 0:11:11.719
<v Speaker 2>averaging twenty seven yards wide. And when it comes to experience,

0:11:12.280 --> 0:11:15.640
<v Speaker 2>there's only been one first timer to win this tournament

0:11:15.640 --> 0:11:17.720
<v Speaker 2>in the last thirty years, and that was Davis Riley

0:11:17.800 --> 0:11:20.520
<v Speaker 2>last year. So by and large, guys need to see

0:11:20.520 --> 0:11:23.760
<v Speaker 2>this course a few times before they have a lasting

0:11:23.800 --> 0:11:27.960
<v Speaker 2>success here. Obviously, Scotti Scheffler is a Dallas native, and

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:30.560
<v Speaker 2>there's quite a few Dallas natives in this field. I

0:11:30.679 --> 0:11:32.680
<v Speaker 2>kinda do give a little bit of a lean to

0:11:32.840 --> 0:11:35.920
<v Speaker 2>those players because Texas golf is kind of a different animal.

0:11:36.480 --> 0:11:38.360
<v Speaker 2>You deal with wind, You don't deal with a lot

0:11:38.400 --> 0:11:41.520
<v Speaker 2>of terrain, but you deal with tree lined fairways and

0:11:41.840 --> 0:11:45.800
<v Speaker 2>very very fast bent grass greens. These greens are going

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:49.719
<v Speaker 2>to be a problem again. Scotty Scheffler plays better when

0:11:49.720 --> 0:11:52.400
<v Speaker 2>the greens are faster. The tougher the conditions get, the

0:11:52.400 --> 0:11:55.520
<v Speaker 2>more the cream rises to the top. So I don't

0:11:55.520 --> 0:11:57.360
<v Speaker 2>know what we're gonna do. We have to pick somebody

0:11:57.400 --> 0:11:59.720
<v Speaker 2>to win this thing and hopefully it'll pay off better

0:11:59.760 --> 0:12:00.720
<v Speaker 2>than last week.

0:12:00.559 --> 0:12:03.880
<v Speaker 1>Did fading Scottie Scheffler. Last week was not too good,

0:12:04.320 --> 0:12:07.280
<v Speaker 1>really good thing. I picked Corey Connors for that top

0:12:07.320 --> 0:12:11.600
<v Speaker 1>twenty plus ties bet at plus one ninety that saved

0:12:11.600 --> 0:12:13.720
<v Speaker 1>me from being skunk for the whole tournament. Bow It

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:15.160
<v Speaker 1>was a yeah off PGA.

0:12:15.840 --> 0:12:18.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I had Bryson top five so that cash for

0:12:18.679 --> 0:12:21.760
<v Speaker 2>me and then a top twenty for I forget who

0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:24.520
<v Speaker 2>it was, but not not important. I didn't. I didn't,

0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:27.560
<v Speaker 2>I didn't break into the black so it was not

0:12:27.600 --> 0:12:30.200
<v Speaker 2>a skunk, but not great. Last week. We're moving on.

0:12:30.800 --> 0:12:34.400
<v Speaker 1>Yes, it's on too, It's onto Fort Worth. We'll get

0:12:34.440 --> 0:12:37.000
<v Speaker 1>to the Charles Schwab Challenge odds in just a moment.

0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:40.880
<v Speaker 2>But first Bet three sixty five has a special offer

0:12:40.960 --> 0:12:43.880
<v Speaker 2>for our listeners turned five dollars in one hundred and

0:12:43.880 --> 0:12:46.280
<v Speaker 2>fifty dollars worth of bonus bets when you joined bet

0:12:46.280 --> 0:12:49.080
<v Speaker 2>three six five. To claim the offer, just go to

0:12:49.120 --> 0:12:52.440
<v Speaker 2>betting pros dot com Slash three six five and deposit

0:12:52.480 --> 0:12:55.080
<v Speaker 2>at least ten dollars. If you place a bet of

0:12:55.120 --> 0:12:57.439
<v Speaker 2>at least five dollars, you'll learn one hundred and fifty

0:12:57.440 --> 0:13:01.640
<v Speaker 2>dollars in bonus bets. Again, that's bettingpros dot Com Slash

0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:05.240
<v Speaker 2>three six five. Twenty one or older only must be

0:13:05.320 --> 0:13:11.160
<v Speaker 2>president in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina,

0:13:11.200 --> 0:13:15.440
<v Speaker 2>New Jersey, Ohio, Tennessee, or Virginia. Gambling problem called one

0:13:15.480 --> 0:13:18.400
<v Speaker 2>eight hundred gambler or if you live in Iowa, one

0:13:18.440 --> 0:13:21.559
<v Speaker 2>eight hundred bets off. Terms and conditions apply.

0:13:21.960 --> 0:13:25.120
<v Speaker 1>Now for the Charles Schwab Challenge. Odds. All odds are

0:13:25.120 --> 0:13:27.720
<v Speaker 1>a courtesy of DraftKings as of Monday. Some of these

0:13:27.760 --> 0:13:30.520
<v Speaker 1>odds may have changed by the time you consume this show.

0:13:30.920 --> 0:13:34.720
<v Speaker 1>Scotti Scheffler is an overwhelming favorite to win at plus

0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:37.319
<v Speaker 1>two point fifty. The odds on Scotti just keep getting

0:13:37.320 --> 0:13:40.160
<v Speaker 1>shorter and shorter bow. Then it's Jordan Spieth at plus

0:13:40.200 --> 0:13:44.560
<v Speaker 1>twenty two hundred, Hideki Matsuyama, Tommy Fleetwood and Daniel Berger

0:13:44.600 --> 0:13:48.320
<v Speaker 1>are plus twenty five hundred, Maverick McNeely is plus three thousand,

0:13:48.760 --> 0:13:51.959
<v Speaker 1>Robert McIntyre, JT. Post In and Harris English are plus

0:13:52.000 --> 0:13:56.440
<v Speaker 1>four thousand, Seewoo Kam, Aaron Raye, Keith Mitchell, JJ Spahn

0:13:56.440 --> 0:13:59.440
<v Speaker 1>and Davis Thompson are plus forty five hundred, and Davis

0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:03.480
<v Speaker 1>Riley is plus five thousand. The same old Scotti Scheffler

0:14:03.559 --> 0:14:06.280
<v Speaker 1>dilemma beau, do we dare bet on him at such

0:14:06.320 --> 0:14:09.040
<v Speaker 1>short odds? Or perhaps the better question would be do

0:14:09.120 --> 0:14:12.000
<v Speaker 1>we dare pass on Scottie Scheffler this week?

0:14:12.320 --> 0:14:14.240
<v Speaker 2>I think that we have to do the live bet

0:14:14.240 --> 0:14:18.720
<v Speaker 2>thing because plus two fifty, that's saying, basically, he's a

0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:21.320
<v Speaker 2>fifty to fifty coin flip to win the same and

0:14:21.440 --> 0:14:23.720
<v Speaker 2>I'm not ready to go that far like this. This

0:14:23.800 --> 0:14:26.560
<v Speaker 2>guy's obviously the best golfer in the world. He's obviously

0:14:26.560 --> 0:14:29.640
<v Speaker 2>playing another golf course right there next to his hometown.

0:14:30.640 --> 0:14:34.600
<v Speaker 2>It's still colonial. Colonial tends to favor other types of

0:14:34.600 --> 0:14:37.680
<v Speaker 2>golfers that are more accuracy driven off the tee. We've

0:14:37.680 --> 0:14:40.600
<v Speaker 2>seen all sorts of different guys win this tournament. Scotti

0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 2>Scheffler isn't one of them. We also said this about

0:14:42.680 --> 0:14:46.240
<v Speaker 2>t PC Craigranch a few weeks ago where he won

0:14:46.280 --> 0:14:50.920
<v Speaker 2>by eight, and so yes, you should bet on Scotti Scheffler.

0:14:50.920 --> 0:14:52.800
<v Speaker 2>I'm just not sure that plus two fifty is the

0:14:52.840 --> 0:14:56.240
<v Speaker 2>way to go. I think we better pay close attention

0:14:56.320 --> 0:14:59.640
<v Speaker 2>to the live lines on Thursday, especially if he gets

0:14:59.680 --> 0:15:02.680
<v Speaker 2>a late tea time draw. Somebody goes out there shoots

0:15:02.720 --> 0:15:05.600
<v Speaker 2>sixty three, sixty four, it could happen. Then you start

0:15:05.640 --> 0:15:08.000
<v Speaker 2>to see Scotty in that plus five hundred plus six

0:15:08.080 --> 0:15:11.680
<v Speaker 2>hundred plus seven hundred territory, then I'm smashing the button there.

0:15:12.160 --> 0:15:14.080
<v Speaker 2>If you have live betting in your state, that's where

0:15:14.120 --> 0:15:18.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm going because plus two fifty, I mean, obviously he's

0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:22.200
<v Speaker 2>gonna be live to win here. But that's a coin flip.

0:15:22.240 --> 0:15:25.280
<v Speaker 2>That's saying you expect Scotty to tee it up and

0:15:25.320 --> 0:15:28.120
<v Speaker 2>win half the time here when he's never won here before.

0:15:28.320 --> 0:15:31.520
<v Speaker 2>It's just a value proposition being a smart better. And

0:15:31.800 --> 0:15:34.040
<v Speaker 2>if you bet on a little bit on a few

0:15:34.040 --> 0:15:37.600
<v Speaker 2>other guys and Scotty wins. It's not that big of

0:15:37.600 --> 0:15:39.840
<v Speaker 2>a loss. You're not putting all your eggs in it

0:15:39.920 --> 0:15:43.040
<v Speaker 2>somebody else beside Scotti Scheffler. You're just saying, Hey, if

0:15:43.080 --> 0:15:45.000
<v Speaker 2>Scotty Shuffler is gonna win this, I just don't want

0:15:45.000 --> 0:15:47.440
<v Speaker 2>it to sting me as bad where we kind of

0:15:47.480 --> 0:15:50.800
<v Speaker 2>got screwed by a major, all these great golfers competing

0:15:50.840 --> 0:15:53.520
<v Speaker 2>with Scotty and end up losing to Scotty by five

0:15:53.560 --> 0:15:56.000
<v Speaker 2>strokes this week. Isn't like that this week. You can

0:15:56.080 --> 0:15:59.400
<v Speaker 2>kind of take your measured picks and just I mean

0:15:59.440 --> 0:16:02.400
<v Speaker 2>obviously hope Scotty doesn't win, or bet Scotty live if

0:16:02.440 --> 0:16:05.760
<v Speaker 2>he starts off slow. It just seems like that's the

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:08.400
<v Speaker 2>best value proposition for a smart betters to go in

0:16:08.440 --> 0:16:12.560
<v Speaker 2>there expecting Scotty to make you hurt again, Like he's

0:16:12.560 --> 0:16:14.760
<v Speaker 2>going to hurt us again, but we need to make

0:16:14.760 --> 0:16:16.760
<v Speaker 2>sure that he doesn't hurt us as bad as he

0:16:16.800 --> 0:16:17.600
<v Speaker 2>did last week.

0:16:18.560 --> 0:16:22.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and you mentioned it, Bo. The nature of colonial

0:16:22.120 --> 0:16:27.240
<v Speaker 1>maybe brings more guys into contention. You know, like Brian

0:16:27.320 --> 0:16:31.080
<v Speaker 1>Harmon and Nico Echeveria are bunters who would not be

0:16:31.120 --> 0:16:33.880
<v Speaker 1>winning at Quail Hollow unless they rolled in several hundred

0:16:33.880 --> 0:16:37.480
<v Speaker 1>feet of potts during the week, whereas like those guys

0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:41.120
<v Speaker 1>could win at Colonial. This is a course that suits

0:16:41.680 --> 0:16:44.600
<v Speaker 1>guys like that. On the other hand, Scotty has won

0:16:44.680 --> 0:16:48.200
<v Speaker 1>his last two events by combined thirteen shots. He hasn't

0:16:48.240 --> 0:16:52.360
<v Speaker 1>won it Colonial yet yet, but he's been top three

0:16:52.400 --> 0:16:54.840
<v Speaker 1>in each of the last three years, including that sudden

0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:59.640
<v Speaker 1>death playoff loss. What about any of the other players

0:16:59.640 --> 0:17:03.120
<v Speaker 1>with fifty to one or shorter bo does anyone stand

0:17:03.120 --> 0:17:05.680
<v Speaker 1>out to you as a possible contender here?

0:17:06.400 --> 0:17:08.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, there's quite a few guys, a lot of them.

0:17:08.400 --> 0:17:10.880
<v Speaker 2>Even with Scottie in the field, You're not getting great

0:17:10.960 --> 0:17:13.520
<v Speaker 2>value on them. Like I'm not interested in Jordan Speith here.

0:17:13.600 --> 0:17:16.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm not interested in Tommy Fleetwood ever, because he never

0:17:16.160 --> 0:17:20.240
<v Speaker 2>wins anything. Daniel Berger's form has been pretty poor when

0:17:20.280 --> 0:17:23.040
<v Speaker 2>it comes to results. His stats look good, results haven't

0:17:23.080 --> 0:17:25.640
<v Speaker 2>been good. I can see Daniel Berger from a few

0:17:25.680 --> 0:17:28.080
<v Speaker 2>years ago when he did win here, that would be

0:17:28.160 --> 0:17:30.600
<v Speaker 2>a good play. But he's going out there plus twenty

0:17:30.600 --> 0:17:34.040
<v Speaker 2>five hundred. I'm not interested Hideki plus twenty eight hundred

0:17:34.119 --> 0:17:36.000
<v Speaker 2>not the best fit. I'm going to go all the

0:17:36.000 --> 0:17:38.960
<v Speaker 2>way down to plus three thousand, Maverick mcneelly playing great golf.

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:42.200
<v Speaker 2>He was briefly in the top ten official World Golf

0:17:42.280 --> 0:17:45.359
<v Speaker 2>rankings because he's on quite a top ten streak this season.

0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:48.439
<v Speaker 2>MATV mcneely's game has been great, his ball striking has

0:17:48.480 --> 0:17:50.600
<v Speaker 2>been much improved, and we're talking about one of the

0:17:50.640 --> 0:17:53.920
<v Speaker 2>best putters on the planet right now riding hot, and

0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:56.719
<v Speaker 2>those are good odds. That's a guy who can actually

0:17:56.760 --> 0:18:00.600
<v Speaker 2>see win this tournament in spite of everything else round him.

0:18:01.240 --> 0:18:04.240
<v Speaker 2>MAV McNeely is the first value I actually see on

0:18:04.240 --> 0:18:06.480
<v Speaker 2>the board at plus three thousand, so I'll start there.

0:18:07.080 --> 0:18:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And Mav finished seventeenth last year at the Charles

0:18:11.119 --> 0:18:14.800
<v Speaker 1>Schwap Challenge, so he's shown that he can get a

0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:18.080
<v Speaker 1>whiff of the leader board here. Jordan Speith, I mean,

0:18:18.160 --> 0:18:22.920
<v Speaker 1>his lengthy record of success at Colonial is pretty impressive.

0:18:22.920 --> 0:18:26.160
<v Speaker 1>Over a ten years stretch from twenty thirteen to twenty

0:18:26.240 --> 0:18:30.439
<v Speaker 1>twenty two, Speed finished top fifteen nine times, including a

0:18:30.480 --> 0:18:33.879
<v Speaker 1>win in twenty sixteen and three second place finishes. But

0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:36.359
<v Speaker 1>we should also note that Speed missed the cut here

0:18:36.400 --> 0:18:38.880
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty three and was thirty seventh last year,

0:18:39.320 --> 0:18:41.520
<v Speaker 1>and he just missed the cut at the PGA so

0:18:41.680 --> 0:18:45.280
<v Speaker 1>maybe not the best trajectory for Jordan Speath, even though

0:18:45.280 --> 0:18:47.560
<v Speaker 1>he is another Dallas guy.

0:18:48.320 --> 0:18:50.760
<v Speaker 2>Let's just the off the te game has been better,

0:18:50.880 --> 0:18:53.399
<v Speaker 2>but not great still because it's Jordan Speith. The dude

0:18:53.440 --> 0:18:56.640
<v Speaker 2>spraysed them all all over the place. But his approach game,

0:18:56.680 --> 0:18:58.720
<v Speaker 2>which is kind of the kind of the hinge point

0:18:58.760 --> 0:19:02.120
<v Speaker 2>of his entire form, has been terrible. His approach game

0:19:02.119 --> 0:19:07.159
<v Speaker 2>has been awful and we can't imagine him obviously missing

0:19:07.160 --> 0:19:10.200
<v Speaker 2>some fairways. He's obviously the best scrambler anybody's ever seen

0:19:10.200 --> 0:19:12.480
<v Speaker 2>because he's just a Houdini act out there every year.

0:19:12.880 --> 0:19:15.359
<v Speaker 2>It boggles my mind that he's had any success at

0:19:15.359 --> 0:19:18.200
<v Speaker 2>Colonial before with the way he hits the ball off

0:19:18.200 --> 0:19:20.119
<v Speaker 2>the tee. But I think it's more of a concern

0:19:20.160 --> 0:19:23.359
<v Speaker 2>of his approach game. Honestly, I don't see him hitting

0:19:23.400 --> 0:19:26.639
<v Speaker 2>it close enough on these little greens to make a

0:19:26.640 --> 0:19:27.680
<v Speaker 2>good score out here.

0:19:28.080 --> 0:19:29.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I'm with you. I just don't see the value

0:19:29.880 --> 0:19:33.760
<v Speaker 1>at twenty two to one. And you know, Daniel Berger

0:19:33.800 --> 0:19:35.720
<v Speaker 1>you mentioned he did win here in twenty twenty and

0:19:36.119 --> 0:19:38.840
<v Speaker 1>has played well lately. A third at the RBC Heritage

0:19:39.160 --> 0:19:42.160
<v Speaker 1>eleventh of the Truest Championship thirty third at the PGA,

0:19:42.680 --> 0:19:46.320
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, Burger statistical profile would seem to fit Colonial

0:19:46.359 --> 0:19:48.720
<v Speaker 1>pretty well, being inside the top twenty and strokes gained

0:19:48.760 --> 0:19:51.800
<v Speaker 1>off the tee and strokes gain an approach top ten

0:19:51.840 --> 0:19:54.960
<v Speaker 1>and driving accuracy, But like you said, Bo, he just

0:19:55.000 --> 0:19:58.359
<v Speaker 1>hasn't been real close to any victories. And as you said,

0:19:58.359 --> 0:20:01.040
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of the case with Tommy Fleetwood two, whose

0:20:01.440 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 1>game would seem to fit here, but maybe more for

0:20:03.840 --> 0:20:07.520
<v Speaker 1>a top twenty than for a win. JT. Postin is

0:20:07.600 --> 0:20:10.280
<v Speaker 1>kind of interesting. He's been playing well. He's finished top

0:20:10.320 --> 0:20:13.720
<v Speaker 1>twenty five and four straight events, including a fifth at

0:20:13.720 --> 0:20:17.000
<v Speaker 1>the PGA, and he has kind of an interesting track

0:20:17.040 --> 0:20:19.800
<v Speaker 1>record at Colonial over the past seven years. Post In

0:20:19.880 --> 0:20:24.160
<v Speaker 1>has three top twenties and four missed cots, So it's

0:20:24.240 --> 0:20:28.640
<v Speaker 1>kind of all or nothing for Posting. And I don't know, boy,

0:20:28.840 --> 0:20:31.400
<v Speaker 1>it seems like Colonial should be right up to Seawou

0:20:31.480 --> 0:20:34.000
<v Speaker 1>Kim's alley. He's accurate off the tee, good with his

0:20:34.040 --> 0:20:37.159
<v Speaker 1>wedges and short irons, but in eight career starts at Colonial,

0:20:37.640 --> 0:20:41.679
<v Speaker 1>Seawou is only finished inside the top fifty once. So

0:20:42.240 --> 0:20:43.480
<v Speaker 1>for whatever reason.

0:20:43.200 --> 0:20:45.760
<v Speaker 2>It's because Pete died didn't design this course.

0:20:46.160 --> 0:20:49.880
<v Speaker 1>A good point one other guy I'll mention Harris English

0:20:49.880 --> 0:20:52.760
<v Speaker 1>has played well lately, tied for second at the PGA

0:20:52.840 --> 0:20:56.720
<v Speaker 1>after shooting a blistering sixty five on Sunday. English is

0:20:56.760 --> 0:20:59.200
<v Speaker 1>a grinder who does his best work on tough courses,

0:20:59.240 --> 0:21:01.920
<v Speaker 1>and he's had three top twenties in his last six

0:21:01.960 --> 0:21:05.960
<v Speaker 1>trips to Colonial, including a runner up finish in twenty sixteen.

0:21:07.000 --> 0:21:09.520
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's look at some of the mid range options.

0:21:09.960 --> 0:21:12.959
<v Speaker 1>Brian Harmon and Michael Kim are plus fifty five hundred.

0:21:13.160 --> 0:21:17.200
<v Speaker 1>Ben Griffin and Andrew Novak are plus six thousand. Ryan Girard,

0:21:17.480 --> 0:21:20.679
<v Speaker 1>Mackenzie Hughes and Lucas Glover are plus sixty five hundred.

0:21:20.960 --> 0:21:25.520
<v Speaker 1>Bud Coley, Akshay Battia, Harry Hall and Torborne Olison r

0:21:25.560 --> 0:21:29.119
<v Speaker 1>plus seven thousand, Kurt Kittyamas plus seventy five hundred and

0:21:29.160 --> 0:21:33.280
<v Speaker 1>At plus eight thousand, Sam Stevens, Alex Smalley, Lee Hodges,

0:21:33.640 --> 0:21:37.240
<v Speaker 1>Kevin Y, Tom Kim and Taylor Moore. Is there anyone

0:21:37.280 --> 0:21:38.160
<v Speaker 1>you like from this group?

0:21:38.200 --> 0:21:43.280
<v Speaker 2>Bo one guy had circled Michael Kim plus fifty five hundred.

0:21:43.440 --> 0:21:46.240
<v Speaker 2>That's a smash pick for me. That's a mispriced. This

0:21:46.359 --> 0:21:48.919
<v Speaker 2>guy is playing better than anybody out there, maybe not

0:21:49.440 --> 0:21:52.119
<v Speaker 2>except for Rory and Scotty. This season, Michael Kim has

0:21:52.160 --> 0:21:55.880
<v Speaker 2>been a case in consistency, and especially on shorter golf

0:21:55.920 --> 0:21:58.600
<v Speaker 2>courses where accuracy is in high demand. Michael Kim is

0:21:58.640 --> 0:22:01.680
<v Speaker 2>the perfect fit here, and I can see him winning

0:22:01.680 --> 0:22:06.119
<v Speaker 2>this thing and continuing his very nice dark Horse Ryder

0:22:06.160 --> 0:22:10.560
<v Speaker 2>Cup candidacy. And it doesn't have anything to do with that.

0:22:10.680 --> 0:22:13.720
<v Speaker 2>Mike Kim last night commented that my swing had really

0:22:13.760 --> 0:22:19.000
<v Speaker 2>good slotting. So I'll take I'll take the compliment from

0:22:19.240 --> 0:22:21.960
<v Speaker 2>from the from the PGA Tour pro. Even though I

0:22:22.040 --> 0:22:24.080
<v Speaker 2>was looking for him to kind of help me with

0:22:24.240 --> 0:22:26.280
<v Speaker 2>fixing my swing, he said it looked good.

0:22:26.320 --> 0:22:29.840
<v Speaker 1>So was this when he was stuck on the tarmac

0:22:29.880 --> 0:22:32.359
<v Speaker 1>killing time? I I want to say Ryan Girard. And

0:22:32.400 --> 0:22:33.840
<v Speaker 1>who was the other person it was?

0:22:34.200 --> 0:22:36.119
<v Speaker 2>It was Ben Griffin and Tom Kim.

0:22:36.400 --> 0:22:38.480
<v Speaker 1>Ben and Tom Camm got it, yeah.

0:22:38.320 --> 0:22:40.120
<v Speaker 2>And they were they were trying to get back to Dallas.

0:22:40.320 --> 0:22:44.520
<v Speaker 2>And and Michael Kim is another Texas guy. He's a

0:22:44.560 --> 0:22:49.040
<v Speaker 2>Houston native and he's uh, he's playing great golf this year,

0:22:49.080 --> 0:22:50.800
<v Speaker 2>and I just think that he's a great fit. I'll

0:22:50.800 --> 0:22:53.160
<v Speaker 2>probably be betting an entire ladder on him every way,

0:22:53.560 --> 0:22:56.240
<v Speaker 2>Mike Kim, fifty five to one's just I would. I

0:22:56.240 --> 0:22:58.040
<v Speaker 2>had him a handicapped at thirty five to one, so

0:22:58.280 --> 0:23:00.840
<v Speaker 2>when I saw fifty five to one, I went after it.

0:23:01.920 --> 0:23:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Now, can I make you roll your eyes with one name?

0:23:04.640 --> 0:23:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Bo Ryan Harman?

0:23:06.640 --> 0:23:12.280
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and I won't do it. It's it makes sense

0:23:12.359 --> 0:23:15.320
<v Speaker 2>stats wise. You look at his proximity numbers on approach,

0:23:15.359 --> 0:23:18.920
<v Speaker 2>they're good. His putting has been good, of course, he's

0:23:18.920 --> 0:23:22.520
<v Speaker 2>He's always been a clutch putter, very accurate off the tee.

0:23:23.480 --> 0:23:26.480
<v Speaker 2>What I worry about him is on approach again, much

0:23:26.560 --> 0:23:29.000
<v Speaker 2>like Speeth, where it's like he has to be good

0:23:29.040 --> 0:23:32.119
<v Speaker 2>on approach. It's this is Brian Harmon. If he's not

0:23:32.520 --> 0:23:36.199
<v Speaker 2>sticking it close, he's not making any birdies. He's just

0:23:36.240 --> 0:23:39.399
<v Speaker 2>got to He's got to compete by hitting it close.

0:23:39.560 --> 0:23:42.639
<v Speaker 2>And so far this year his approach game has been atrocious.

0:23:43.080 --> 0:23:46.399
<v Speaker 2>So I'll let you bet on Brian Harmon. And if

0:23:46.440 --> 0:23:47.920
<v Speaker 2>you want to make him your one and done pick,

0:23:48.000 --> 0:23:51.320
<v Speaker 2>if you haven't burned him multiple times already, I would

0:23:51.440 --> 0:23:52.080
<v Speaker 2>encourage that.

0:23:53.400 --> 0:23:55.879
<v Speaker 1>So, I mean, maybe he's a better play for a

0:23:55.960 --> 0:23:59.800
<v Speaker 1>top ten or top twenty. He has been consistently solid

0:24:00.040 --> 0:24:03.040
<v Speaker 1>Colonial Over the last ten years, He's finished thirty first

0:24:03.160 --> 0:24:06.840
<v Speaker 1>or better nine times. That includes three top tens but

0:24:07.040 --> 0:24:10.399
<v Speaker 1>zero top five. So yeah, I mean, I like that

0:24:10.440 --> 0:24:13.000
<v Speaker 1>the lack of distance at Colonial is not going to

0:24:13.080 --> 0:24:15.879
<v Speaker 1>hurt him that much. Yeah, is he going to contend?

0:24:15.920 --> 0:24:16.320
<v Speaker 1>I don't know.

0:24:17.240 --> 0:24:19.680
<v Speaker 2>You mentioned you mentioned Taylor Moore at eighty to one.

0:24:19.880 --> 0:24:22.439
<v Speaker 2>I'm interested now, I'm looking at the I'm looking at

0:24:22.480 --> 0:24:25.240
<v Speaker 2>the recent finishes and Taylor Moore was great last week.

0:24:25.760 --> 0:24:28.040
<v Speaker 2>He's a sneaky one. Eighty one is a decent number

0:24:28.080 --> 0:24:29.359
<v Speaker 2>for him. So I think I'm going to take a

0:24:29.359 --> 0:24:32.399
<v Speaker 2>closer look at Taylor Moore now that he popped up

0:24:32.440 --> 0:24:35.280
<v Speaker 2>on your call out list. Yeah.

0:24:35.320 --> 0:24:38.040
<v Speaker 1>And Ben Griffin one of the guys stuck on the

0:24:38.080 --> 0:24:41.359
<v Speaker 1>tarmac with Michael Kim. He's played well lately, but I

0:24:41.359 --> 0:24:45.919
<v Speaker 1>would caution anyone playing the hotthand that, you know, the

0:24:46.000 --> 0:24:48.000
<v Speaker 1>numbers say he's just not very good with the short

0:24:48.040 --> 0:24:51.760
<v Speaker 1>irons and wedges, so true. I don't know about Ben Griffin.

0:24:51.840 --> 0:24:54.560
<v Speaker 1>Ryan Gerard is kind of mildly interesting. He said three

0:24:54.640 --> 0:24:57.639
<v Speaker 1>top tens over the last two months and is a

0:24:57.680 --> 0:25:01.560
<v Speaker 1>pretty good short iron player. And Harry Hall, I know

0:25:01.560 --> 0:25:03.240
<v Speaker 1>He's been in the top twenty each of the last

0:25:03.280 --> 0:25:06.520
<v Speaker 1>two weeks. He's played this event twice and was third

0:25:06.560 --> 0:25:09.000
<v Speaker 1>here in twenty twenty three, although he missed the cut

0:25:09.080 --> 0:25:12.080
<v Speaker 1>last year. What about intriguing long shots bow anyone in

0:25:12.160 --> 0:25:14.760
<v Speaker 1>eighty five to one or longer who might be worth

0:25:14.760 --> 0:25:15.240
<v Speaker 1>a flyer?

0:25:15.880 --> 0:25:19.760
<v Speaker 2>Funny you should ask Pat? I have four? Oh, okay, yeah,

0:25:19.640 --> 0:25:23.159
<v Speaker 2>we're starting with Jacob Bridgeman ninety to one. He's been

0:25:23.200 --> 0:25:25.200
<v Speaker 2>playing great this year and ninety to one is another

0:25:25.240 --> 0:25:27.760
<v Speaker 2>miss price with how well he's playing this year. A

0:25:27.880 --> 0:25:30.240
<v Speaker 2>great short iron player. That's what I'm looking for is

0:25:30.280 --> 0:25:33.560
<v Speaker 2>guys that a can get off the tee and find fairways,

0:25:33.840 --> 0:25:37.240
<v Speaker 2>and b they can go attack pins. Jacob Bridgeman's playing

0:25:37.280 --> 0:25:40.200
<v Speaker 2>great golf this year. One and twenty to one. Mac

0:25:40.240 --> 0:25:43.280
<v Speaker 2>Meisner he finished high here last year and he's been

0:25:43.320 --> 0:25:45.840
<v Speaker 2>playing good golf this year in his first full time

0:25:45.920 --> 0:25:48.399
<v Speaker 2>season on the PGA Tour. One hundred and twenty to one.

0:25:48.440 --> 0:25:52.040
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna take my shots. I'm intrigued by seventeen year

0:25:52.040 --> 0:25:55.320
<v Speaker 2>old Blades Brown one hundred and fifty to one's he's

0:25:55.359 --> 0:25:58.199
<v Speaker 2>a decently long hitter for his size and age, but

0:25:58.359 --> 0:26:01.199
<v Speaker 2>he's also very accurate, and he makes a ton of

0:26:01.200 --> 0:26:04.719
<v Speaker 2>birdies because he's always in plays. He's kind of like

0:26:05.000 --> 0:26:08.840
<v Speaker 2>your little Scotti Scheffler in waiting, where he's the seventeen

0:26:08.920 --> 0:26:12.040
<v Speaker 2>year old version of Scotti who's really good at finding

0:26:12.080 --> 0:26:15.240
<v Speaker 2>fairways and getting it close on approach. I think that

0:26:15.240 --> 0:26:17.240
<v Speaker 2>that's a fun pick at one hundred and fifty to

0:26:17.240 --> 0:26:18.879
<v Speaker 2>one to go to see what the kid can do

0:26:18.960 --> 0:26:19.320
<v Speaker 2>out here.

0:26:19.880 --> 0:26:21.240
<v Speaker 1>And then why is.

0:26:21.280 --> 0:26:25.119
<v Speaker 2>Carl Phillips two hundred and fifty to one. He won

0:26:25.240 --> 0:26:28.760
<v Speaker 2>this year on the PGA Tour. He's really really good.

0:26:28.800 --> 0:26:31.879
<v Speaker 2>He's the face of Sunday Red. It makes no sense

0:26:31.880 --> 0:26:33.679
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to be betting a ladder on Carl Phillips

0:26:33.720 --> 0:26:36.600
<v Speaker 2>again because he keeps paying us.

0:26:38.000 --> 0:26:40.479
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I don't blame me for that one. Let me

0:26:40.600 --> 0:26:44.600
<v Speaker 1>throw some other long shots out you bow, and some

0:26:44.640 --> 0:26:47.320
<v Speaker 1>of these might not be quite as long as your guys.

0:26:47.320 --> 0:26:50.520
<v Speaker 1>But we're getting ninety to one odds on Emiliano Grio,

0:26:50.640 --> 0:26:53.080
<v Speaker 1>who won here in twenty twenty three and has had

0:26:53.119 --> 0:26:55.600
<v Speaker 1>two other top tens and a couple of other top

0:26:55.640 --> 0:26:58.040
<v Speaker 1>twenty five. So he is a horse for the course

0:26:58.880 --> 0:27:01.680
<v Speaker 1>and going off at pretty long odds. Hasn't had a

0:27:01.760 --> 0:27:04.760
<v Speaker 1>terrible season either. I'm surprised he's ninety to one. I'm

0:27:05.040 --> 0:27:08.600
<v Speaker 1>intrigued by the aforementioned Nico Etriveriat one hundred and twenty

0:27:08.640 --> 0:27:11.000
<v Speaker 1>to one. He's he's short but straight off the tee,

0:27:11.040 --> 0:27:14.960
<v Speaker 1>and he's a good potter he is. And Paul another

0:27:15.040 --> 0:27:18.800
<v Speaker 1>guy who just it seems like the oddsmakers haven't caught

0:27:18.840 --> 0:27:22.440
<v Speaker 1>up on him yet. Sammy Vallamachi ranks thirty fifth and

0:27:22.560 --> 0:27:25.960
<v Speaker 1>strokes gained total twenty third. Strokes gained an approach tenth

0:27:26.040 --> 0:27:28.800
<v Speaker 1>in strokes gained putting, He's one hundred and fifty to one.

0:27:29.119 --> 0:27:31.800
<v Speaker 2>Yes, please, all right, let's go baby, all.

0:27:31.760 --> 0:27:33.600
<v Speaker 1>Right, bo, who's on your betting card as of now?

0:27:34.240 --> 0:27:37.320
<v Speaker 2>I got Matt McNeely thirty to one, Michael Kim fifty

0:27:37.320 --> 0:27:40.600
<v Speaker 2>five to one full ladder, Jacob Bridgeman ninety to one,

0:27:40.840 --> 0:27:43.879
<v Speaker 2>Mac Meisner one hundred twenty to one, Blades Brown one

0:27:43.920 --> 0:27:47.119
<v Speaker 2>hundred and fifty to one, and our favorite OSSI Carl

0:27:47.160 --> 0:27:50.040
<v Speaker 2>Phillips two hundred and fifty to one full ladder, the

0:27:50.080 --> 0:27:52.479
<v Speaker 2>whole shebang. If I'm going to be spending any kind

0:27:52.520 --> 0:27:54.359
<v Speaker 2>of money on this tournament, it's not gonna be on

0:27:54.400 --> 0:27:57.040
<v Speaker 2>Scotty to win. It'll be fun to see Scotty win

0:27:57.080 --> 0:27:59.560
<v Speaker 2>another one, but I'm gonna get my licks in on

0:27:59.600 --> 0:28:02.080
<v Speaker 2>a guy who's already won this year and he's still

0:28:02.200 --> 0:28:03.560
<v Speaker 2>not getting any respect.

0:28:04.440 --> 0:28:05.840
<v Speaker 1>Boy, I didn't want to say it while you were

0:28:05.840 --> 0:28:07.800
<v Speaker 1>making your case against betting Scotty.

0:28:08.400 --> 0:28:10.080
<v Speaker 2>Before you're betting Scotty.

0:28:10.400 --> 0:28:12.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm betting Scotty at plus two fifty. If you can't

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:15.760
<v Speaker 1>beat him, join him. I'm taking Brian Harmon for a

0:28:15.880 --> 0:28:20.080
<v Speaker 1>top right now. I'm top five at plus eight fifty,

0:28:20.160 --> 0:28:23.080
<v Speaker 1>but I might stretch that out to top twenty. I

0:28:23.080 --> 0:28:25.080
<v Speaker 1>don't know about top five. That might be a little rich.

0:28:25.720 --> 0:28:28.360
<v Speaker 1>Emiliano Grio, I'm taking him at ninety to one, also

0:28:28.480 --> 0:28:31.320
<v Speaker 1>a top twenty including ties at plus two point eighty

0:28:31.760 --> 0:28:34.480
<v Speaker 1>going with the horse for the course, and then small

0:28:34.560 --> 0:28:37.480
<v Speaker 1>outrights on Nico Etcheveria at one hundred and twenty to

0:28:37.520 --> 0:28:41.040
<v Speaker 1>one and Sammy Vallamachi at one hundred and fifty to one.

0:28:41.200 --> 0:28:43.200
<v Speaker 1>Now for our one and done picks. Last week, Bo,

0:28:43.360 --> 0:28:48.040
<v Speaker 1>you had Bryson de Schambeau at the PGA, tied for second,

0:28:48.480 --> 0:28:50.920
<v Speaker 1>earning you more than one point four million dollars. I

0:28:50.920 --> 0:28:55.600
<v Speaker 1>had Rory McElroy. He was bitterly disappointing, tying for forty

0:28:55.680 --> 0:29:00.200
<v Speaker 1>seventh and earning me forty nine and ninety dollars in sol.

0:29:00.160 --> 0:29:02.360
<v Speaker 2>To injury and the one and done format.

0:29:02.680 --> 0:29:05.440
<v Speaker 1>Yes it is. You're now way up on me. In fact,

0:29:05.440 --> 0:29:07.880
<v Speaker 1>you've doubled me up. You're at about six point seven

0:29:07.960 --> 0:29:11.320
<v Speaker 1>million for the season. I'm at about three point two million,

0:29:11.880 --> 0:29:13.960
<v Speaker 1>and you have the honors this week at the Charles Schwab.

0:29:14.000 --> 0:29:14.800
<v Speaker 1>Who are you taking?

0:29:15.440 --> 0:29:18.240
<v Speaker 2>I'm guessing that this money is gonna be paid to

0:29:18.320 --> 0:29:20.360
<v Speaker 2>be by Charles Swab at the end of the season,

0:29:21.280 --> 0:29:24.680
<v Speaker 2>all the one and done earnings. Right, I'm gonna go

0:29:24.800 --> 0:29:27.720
<v Speaker 2>with the with the man that that I've been riding

0:29:27.800 --> 0:29:34.280
<v Speaker 2>high on all season, especially since yesterday. Michael Kim, Michael.

0:29:34.040 --> 0:29:40.120
<v Speaker 1>Kim very nice. I am going to go for Maverick McNeely.

0:29:41.240 --> 0:29:43.760
<v Speaker 2>Hey, a shout out, norcl Yeah, and.

0:29:43.960 --> 0:29:45.640
<v Speaker 1>I might just have to bat him too. I mean,

0:29:45.680 --> 0:29:47.360
<v Speaker 1>you make a good case for him, bo.

0:29:47.640 --> 0:29:50.640
<v Speaker 2>So he's a licensed pilot, so that's pretty cool.

0:29:50.680 --> 0:29:54.240
<v Speaker 1>Yes, sir, So, Michael Kim and Maverick McNeely are one

0:29:54.240 --> 0:29:56.480
<v Speaker 1>and done picks for this week, and that is going

0:29:56.520 --> 0:29:59.600
<v Speaker 1>to do it for the Betting Pros PGA podcast come

0:29:59.680 --> 0:30:02.440
<v Speaker 1>join us again next week when we'll be previewing the Memorial,

0:30:02.520 --> 0:30:05.160
<v Speaker 1>always one of the best non majors on the PGA

0:30:05.240 --> 0:30:09.160
<v Speaker 1>Tour calendar. Until then, solong everyone.

0:30:08.800 --> 0:30:11.400
<v Speaker 3>Thanks for listening to the Betting Pros podcast. If you

0:30:11.480 --> 0:30:13.840
<v Speaker 3>love the show, the best freeway to support us is

0:30:13.840 --> 0:30:17.240
<v Speaker 3>by leaving a positive review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

0:30:17.520 --> 0:30:20.160
<v Speaker 3>Follow us on x and TikTok at Betting Pros and

0:30:20.240 --> 0:30:23.920
<v Speaker 3>Instagram at Betting Pros NFL. Also subscribe to our YouTube

0:30:23.960 --> 0:30:37.640
<v Speaker 3>channel at YouTube dot com slash Betting Pros.